God's Judgment of Dead Babies

[Smart_Guy]

Even with all life's hardships, I think that life is still a net positive most of the time. At the very least, I'm open to the possibility that someone facing a life of adversity could rationally prefer life to death.

When it comes to Heaven and Hell, though, there's no question of what's rational: if Heaven and Hell exist, then Heaven is preferable to Hell, period.

Yes - it would probably mean incurring the wrath of God. A person wouldn't choose to endure this to protect someone else from God's wrath unless they truly, deeply, selflessly loved them. This is why I said that it would be the ultimate act of charity.

Well, death takes only a hard enough hit, which is way much easier than life's hardships. This means according to your logic death is better than life, period. According to your logic, atheists killing their children would be the ultimate act of charity.

Don't tell me that you do not know that believers care for God's satisfaction more than anything else, like killing their own children?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well, death takes only a hard enough hit, which is way much easier than life's hardships. This means according to your logic death is better than life, period. According to your logic, atheists killing their children would be the ultimate act of charity.

If you think that this is "my logic", then you don't understand my argument.

Don't tell me that you do not know that believers care for God's satisfaction more than anything else, like killing their own children?

Some of them, sure, but that just speaks more to my point: if one person loves another so much that they would not only consign themselves to Hell but also disobey their God to protect that other person, then that love would be monumental.

I also realize that there are plenty of believers who deliberately do things that they think go against the will of their God. Think about all the people you know who believe God wants them to pray five times a day. Do all of them actually pray five times a day? I doubt it.

 

[columbus]

According to your logic, atheists killing their children would be the ultimate act of charity.

No, an atheist killing their children would be depriving them of the only life they have. That is not charity.
A believer killing their child is making the ultimate sacrifice. According to religious logic, abortion is the ideal method of protecting your child from the risk of damnation. What could be better for your child than that?

Tom

 

[Harmonious]

So Orthodox Jews believe in reincarnation?

I know there are a couple of places in the Bible that appear to be saying that.

*

Also, we aren't given to know what circumstances would create reincarnation. We have a few anecdotes which might be some examples, but they are by no means definitive of all situations.

 

[Forever_Catholic]

The soul enters the body at conception, when the first cell of the new life is formed. And God creates each soul in his image and likeness, desiring that he/she will be with Him forever in heaven after the earthly life is over. A baby carries original sin until baptism, but has no personal sin. Since God is not bound by sacraments, a baby who dies without having been baptized would still be saved, according to the merciful nature of God. This would apply to babies who are murdered in the womb also.

And suppose God knows that a given baby would have grown up to be an unrepentant sinner, and would have been condemned. Do think He would punish that soul for eternity for sins not yet committed? Of course not. The baby will never develop a tendency to sin in heaven. He/she will be forever pure.

 

[arthra]

For Baha'is the souls of infants are covered by the mercy of God...

Question: "What becomes of an undeveloped infant's soul?"

Answer by 'Abdu'l-Bahá:

"It rests with the mercy of God and through the eternal bounty it will not be deprived of that mercy."

Ten Days in the Light of Acca, page 4.
__________


Children of unbelievers and infidels who die before the age of responsibility are not punished, because they are under the favour of God.

Mrs L. M. G. Notes.
__________

(SOW - Star of the West, Star of the West - 5)

 

[Ingledsva]

The soul enters the body at conception, when the first cell of the new life is formed. And God creates each soul in his image and likeness, desiring that he/she will be with Him forever in heaven after the earthly life is over. A baby carries original sin until baptism, but has no personal sin. Since God is not bound by sacraments, a baby who dies without having been baptized would still be saved, according to the merciful nature of God. This would apply to babies who are murdered in the womb also.

And suppose God knows that a given baby would have grown up to be an unrepentant sinner, and would have been condemned. Do think He would punish that soul for eternity for sins not yet committed? Of course not. The baby will never develop a tendency to sin in heaven. He/she will be forever pure.

A baby has no sin - period! The idea that they do is both ridiculous - and repugnant - at the same time.

It has been shown here several times, that Tanakh actually does not say we are born with sin.

It says - Because of their sin, - we are born into the consequences, - a world where sin exists, - along with the choice to choose.

But NOT born sinners!

EDIT - I forgot to add that Tanakh doesn't say anything about souls entering at conception either. In fact most Hebrew writing say at birth, or even later. And I believe the age of reason is considered 12? And abortion was obviously allowed. I have posted rabbinical pages on this before.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

For Baha'is the souls of infants are covered by the mercy of God...

Question: "What becomes of an undeveloped infant's soul?"

Answer by 'Abdu'l-Bahá:

"It rests with the mercy of God and through the eternal bounty it will not be deprived of that mercy."

Ten Days in the Light of Acca, page 4.
__________


Children of unbelievers and infidels who die before the age of responsibility are not punished, because they are under the favour of God.

Mrs L. M. G. Notes.
__________

(SOW - Star of the West, Star of the West - 5)

Baha'i teachings have some great ideas.

One book that I read - said if you only have enough money to send one of your kids to school, - send your daughter,- because in most of the world women teach children. If you educate women, it will raise the education levels for ALL, and hence the conditions for the whole society.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

Also, we aren't given to know what circumstances would create reincarnation. We have a few anecdotes which might be some examples, but they are by no means definitive of all situations.

Interesting, what are they?

*

 

[Forever_Catholic]

Since the fall of man in the garden, no person has been born without sin except Saint Mary (the Immaculate Conception), and then Jesus of course, in His human nature.

There is no living body at any age without a soul because it is the soul that animates the body.

 

[Ingledsva]

Since the fall of man in the garden, no person has been born without sin except Saint Mary (the Immaculate Conception), and then Jesus of course, in His human nature.

There is no living body at any age without a soul because it is the soul that animates the body.

Says who? Not Tanakh! Perhaps that upstart religion that misinterpreted Hebrew texts, and claimed their Messiah?

*

 

[Harmonious]

Interesting, what are they?

*

Perhaps they were saintly people who had one seriously outstanding sin that kept them from the one place they were truly intended, so they needed to come back and fix that one thing they did wrong in the next life.

Perhaps, in this life, they did someone wrong, and now they are doing something in this world to make it up to that person.

Perhaps, they were wicked, but not even a 12-month rest before moving on to their final resting place will fix the problems preventing them from going to their final reward. (Eternal punishment is rather special for individuals hellbent on genocide, and similar catastrophic sins, not for ordinary individuals.)

We don't ultimately know. The soul does, even before a baby is born. But just before the baby is born, it forgets everything so it starts life with a clean slate.

 

[Forever_Catholic]

Says who? Not Tanakh! Perhaps that upstart religion that misinterpreted Hebrew texts, and claimed their Messiah?

Says Catholicism. I know we can't agree on these things. Maybe someday.

If you ever want to look into it, you might read a translation of the ancient Hebrew texts or the Greek Septuagint as it was before the destruction of the Temple and the sacred Jewish texts in 70 A.D. Many, many Jews converted to Christianity, especially after the resurrection, because they knew the messianic prophesies in the Septuagint and saw them fulfilled in Christ. That was a thorn in the side of anti-Christian Jews, so they rewrote the Septuagint, intentionally rewording certain verses to obscure these prophesies. For example, where it said in Isaiah that a virgin would give birth to a son, the new version, the Jamnian-Palestinian Translation, said "a young woman will give birth to a son." These changes were preserved in the Masoretic Texts.

 

[Smart_Guy]

If you think that this is "my logic", then you don't understand my argument.

Some of them, sure, but that just speaks more to my point: if one person loves another so much that they would not only consign themselves to Hell but also disobey their God to protect that other person, then that love would be monumental.

I also realize that there are plenty of believers who deliberately do things that they think go against the will of their God. Think about all the people you know who believe God wants them to pray five times a day. Do all of them actually pray five times a day? I doubt it.

Let's get one thing straight... are you saying it is wrong that God always sends those who die as innocent children to heaven? You believe it is better to send them to hell, into nothingness, or another option in the poll above?

Besides, you seem to talk people here, not religion. People do whatever they want and that is not an issue to me. People do mistakes. All I care about is that in my religion dead innocent children go to heaven and that killing them is a crime, wrong and a great sin.

Children murderers are, and by common sense, low lives. Or do you disagree with this one too?

No, an atheist killing their children would be depriving them of the only life they have. That is not charity.
A believer killing their child is making the ultimate sacrifice. According to religious logic, abortion is the ideal method of protecting your child from the risk of damnation. What could be better for your child than that?

Tom

That's what I asked, according to the subject ultimate sacrifice, even taking the one life is way much better than the possibility of living in fear, torture, sickness, agony,wars, etc. Does that make it right? Atheists know that! All people know that, but the difference is countering it lies in the beliefs.

If it is the ultimate sacrifice for believers, then we would see all believers world wide do it in a mass. We don't. Besides, believing is in the heart. Non believers would not understand.

Believers know that doing a sin to achieve a good, does not make it right. Of course there are exception, because we are people and people have their individual thoughts.

 

[Ingledsva]

Says Catholicism. I know we can't agree on these things. Maybe someday.

If you ever want to look into it, you might read a translation of the ancient Hebrew texts or the Greek Septuagint as it was before the destruction of the Temple and the sacred Jewish texts in 70 A.D. Many, many Jews converted to Christianity, especially after the resurrection, because they knew the messianic prophesies in the Septuagint and saw them fulfilled in Christ. That was a thorn in the side of anti-Christian Jews, so they rewrote the Septuagint, intentionally rewording certain verses to obscure these prophesies. For example, where it said in Isaiah that a virgin would give birth to a son, the new version, the Jamnian-Palestinian Translation, said "a young woman will give birth to a son." These changes were preserved in the Masoretic Texts.

Says Catholicism? What do you mean there?

I have the Hebrew, and Greek texts, including the Septuagint, on my computer.

Be specific so I can look the verses up, and we can debate the translations.

I looked up Isaiah 7:14 in the Septuagint, and it says parthenos.

However, it is translated from the Hebrew almah, maiden, - not bethulah, which would definitely be a virgin, which is why these days, any scholar worth his salt, translates it as maiden.

Plus, obviously, it says nothing about staying a virgin after popping out a baby.

*

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Let's get one thing straight... are you saying it is wrong that God always sends those who die as innocent children to heaven? You believe it is better to send them to hell, into nothingness, or another option in the poll above?

I haven't said anything about whether it would be right or wrong for God to do this. I'm only talking about the implications if God did do this.

Besides, you seem to talk people here, not religion. People do whatever they want and that is not an issue to me. People do mistakes.

You were the one who brought up what people do. I was responding to that:

Don't tell me that you do not know that believers care for God's satisfaction more than anything else, like killing their own children?

All I care about is that in my religion dead innocent children go to heaven and that killing them is a crime, wrong and a great sin.

Children murderers are, and by common sense, low lives. Or do you disagree with this one too?

I think that someone who deliberately makes a child suffer is evil. I think that someone who kills a child without making him or her suffer in order to ensure thet go to Heaven is deluded, but acting consistently with a delusion that's shared by many believers.

 

[jonathan180iq]

If memories signify the onset of a soul, does that mean that amnesiacs get a free pass for all of the blank spots in their memories/souls?

I'd like to watch a Christian who believes in the doctrine of original sin, and supposedly the whole reason for Jesus' crucifixion, argue with those people who believe that babies are just blank slates who get a free ride until they are cognizant...

Here are just a couple of passages from the text of the Christian deity that don't support the theory of soulless until memory:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Psalms 51:5
Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.

Psalms 58:3
The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.

Proverbs 22:15
Foolishness [is] bound in the heart of a child; [but] the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.

Romans 5:12
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned

Romans 3:23
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God

Ephesians 2:3
Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.

Romans 5:19
For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

 

[jonathan180iq]

Says Catholicism? What do you mean there?

It's in their Catechisms, along with all forms of other zany things:

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a3p2.htm

 

[Smart_Guy]

I haven't said anything about whether it would be right or wrong for God to do this. I'm only talking about the implications if God did do this.

You were the one who brought up what people do. I was responding to that:

I think that someone who deliberately makes a child suffer is evil. I think that someone who kills a child without making him or her suffer in order to ensure thet go to Heaven is deluded, but acting consistently with a delusion that's shared by many believers.

I understand. All I can say more is that I, as a believer, would never kill a child because I know they are going to heaven. Children have their own lives and I'm in no position to take it from them. This is part of being a believer to me.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I understand. All I can say more is that I, as a believer, would never kill a child because I know they are going to heaven. Children have their own lives and I'm in no position to take it from them. This is part of being a believer to me.

So you value God's sovereignty more than the well-being of children? Fair enough - value judgements are personal.